7 ms·
2400 phone providers may be shut down by the FCC for failing to stop robocalls
- gs17 2y agoThe full title of "Over 2,400 Voice Service Providers Face Removal for Failing to Comply with the Robocall Mitigation Database Filing Requirements" is a lot more clear. > Removal from the database means other providers will be prohibited from accepting call traffic from these providers.
- dang 2y agoUnfortunately that doesn't fit HN's 80 char limit. I've taken a crack at it, but if anyone can suggest a better title, we can change it again. (Submitted title was "FCC Could Block Over 2,400 Providers from Robocall Mitigation Database".)
- zimpenfish 2y ago"2k4 VSPs face removal re: compliance fail re: robocall mitigation DB filing reqs" is 80 but I'd say it was probably a bit on the cheating side.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago> 2k4 VSPs As an English speaker, I'd interpret 2k4 as 2004, not 2400. In Chinese that structure would mean 2400, though I don't know how widely understood the K would be. Where are you from?
- gs17 2y agoYeah, it should be 2.4k in English. Can probably trade the 's' in "reqs" for the decimal point.
- whatsupdog 2y ago2.4k has the exact same number of characters as 2400.
- thaumasiotes 2y agoOn the other hand, "2.4k" is inherently imprecise, whereas you'd need "2400+" to be similarly imprecise. You also save on the comma in "2,400".
- zimpenfish 2y ago> Can probably trade the 's' in "reqs" for the decimal point. I was iffy about dropping the 's' from 'reqs' to get it to 79 (makes it sound like they've only violated one requirement, not multiple) but then I suppose the whole thing is that truncated/abbreviated by that point, it doesn't matter...
- mlyle 2y agoLots of users of engineering notation do this.. 1M5 = 1,500,000, 22k1 = 22,100, etc. The unit takes the place of the decimal point. A missing dot doesn't change the meaning.
- fuzzfactor 2y agoExactly, putting (meaningful) characters instead of dots got really going when copy machines made some dots disappear after more than one "copy of a copy" was made. Then when fax machines came along sometimes dots would disappear or be unclear on a single transmission. Either way, occasionally sometimes the page would also be scattered with random dots too because of degraded photosensitive operation, or audio-frequency noise on the telephone line at the time. And it got even more uncertain when text that is not fixed-width got within mainstream reach :\
- zimpenfish 2y ago> As an English speaker, I'd interpret 2k4 as 2004, not 2400. Whereas as an English speaker, I'd interpret 2k4 as 2400 because, well, that's just how it's always been in my orbits (cf resistor labelling, for example.)
- thaumasiotes 2y agoCompare https://unreal.fandom.com/wiki/Unreal_Tournament_2004 https://unreal.fandom.com/wiki/Unreal_Tournament_2004 > Unreal Tournament 2004, also known as UT2K4 and UT2004 or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_2K#Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_2K#Games
- zimpenfish 2y agoBoth, I would contend, come under the "American English" banner and thus can be rightly shunned as abhorrent misuses.
- zimpenfish 2y agoOccurs to me that I could have done ">2k VSPs" and avoided the "2k4" controversy but I expect it'd just cause more arguments about whether ">2k" is valid for ">2400"...
- jandrese 2y ago2,400 telephone providers fail to stop robocalls, may be shut down by the FCC. I'm not sure if being removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database is tantamount to being shut down, but it sounds like it to me.
- dang 2y agoThanks! I've used that, reordered just a bit.
- ksp-atlas 2y agoYeah this headline smells of crash blossoms, I read "face removal" as in the act of removing a face and I got confused
- water-data-dude 2y agoYeah, I had to read the HN title a few times before the meaning clicked
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoBut will other providers be able to send text messages to those 2400 providers? My life depends on it.
- tyingq 2y agoI have seen a significant decrease in the amount of spam telephone calls over the last couple of years. Is that what everybody else is seeing? That maybe Stir/Shaken is actually starting to work? I guess it could just be that generational social change... where more people just don't take phone calls. So the ROI for spam calls has reduced...
- Ensorceled 2y agoIt comes in waves; pretty much nothing for months and then 5+ a day for the past few days.
- tyingq 2y agoIf it is that the ROI is just real unattractive for spam calls now... I wonder if the waves are just new people trying to spam for the first time. And taking a little bit of time to figure out that it's not profitable. If so that's not great. Because there's probably an infinite supply of people ready to waste their money trying get-rich-quick crap.
- imiric 2y agoWhether it's profitable is relative. For relatively little effort anyone with a bit of tech know-how can setup a spam/scam operation. If they also happen to live in a low-income region and target high-income regions, they only need to scam a handful of people a month to get a decent ROI. The amount of vulnerable people is unfortunately high, especially among the elderly. Jim Browning on YouTube does great work exposing this scum. There are huge call center operations in India and Pakistan, and the local authorities are useless if not complicit. This will only get more popular and profitable once AI tools get more accessible. There's no need to have a physical location and hire humans if they can just launch a army of bots that have perfect accents and can follow a conversation without deviating from the script. The next generation of robocalls is just starting.
- karlshea 2y agoSpam calls have decreased, spam texts increased.
- zelon88 2y agoHere's the link to the PDF; https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-408083A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-408083A1.pdf
- dang 2y agoSince there's a plain text version, we changed the url to that instead. (Submitted url was https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-could-block-over-2400-providers-robocall-mitigation-database https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-could-block-over-2400-provi....)
- m3047 2y agoOoma isn't in there (woot! that's my VOIP to DECT provider). There's a Zoom Telcom, but I don't think it's the Zoom we all know.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoPSA - use a free carrier lookup website to see where your spam calls and texts come from. Mine mostly come from Bandwidth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_Inc.), Sinch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinch_AB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinch_AB), and other such platforms with APIs. It appears these companies have very poor anti abuse practices. When I contacted them for help they basically refused to reveal how my number was obtained, what their practices were in establishing consent, and did no more than block one specific number each time from contacting me. Sometimes they claimed they’re just a wholesale reseller and have no obligations to take more action. They didn’t even respond to my repeated request to preserve data and communications relating to these repeated abuse cases. These companies should be shut down and their executives should be personally fined.
- aspenmayer 2y agoWhat's an example of these free carrier lookup websites?
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoSome example websites I got from a quick web search: https://freecarrierlookup.com/ https://freecarrierlookup.com/ https://www.carrierlookup.com/ https://www.carrierlookup.com/ https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-carrier-lookup https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-carrier-lookup By looking up the carrier you can then find the right company to complain to via their reporting process, if they have one. And additionally you can file a report to the FTC and FCC that mentions them. EDIT: The idea is that you complain to the company whose platform is sending you spam, the regulatory agencies at https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/ https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/ and https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/ https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/, your own cell phone carrier by forwarding text spam to 7726, and that will result in actions that hopefully will address that one situation but also collectively reduce spam for everyone. Without identifying which platform sent you the spam, you cannot know which company to go complain to (they usually have a reporting tool on their website). And you can name them in your complaints to the FCC and FTC.
- alwa 2y agoI wonder which state abstained from “the FCC’s robocall enforcement partnerships with leaders from 49 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam.”
- _n_b_ 2y agoIt’s Nebraska.
- alwa 2y agoSearch as I may, I can’t for the life of me find the reason why. Does the robocalling industry have particular pull in Nebraska for some reason, or as far as we can tell are they just wanting to go their own way?
- geraldcombs 2y agoThe explanation someone gave me years ago was that midwesterners can speak to northerners and southerners without needing a translator, and the cost of labor in rural Nebraska and Kansas (which also had a ton of call centers at the time) is low.
- hollerith 2y agoHmm. Can I configure my smartphone to block all calls from Nebraska?
- maybelsyrup 2y agoSorry, I feel dumb for asking, but what does “voice service providers” mean here? Like, Verizon and TMobile etc etc? Can’t be because there aren’t 2,411 cell companies.
- woodson 2y agoI assume any company offering VoIP services that interact with phone numbers (Direct inward/outward dialing, DID etc) is potentially included. E.g., virtual PBX, Twilio and so on.
- bluGill 2y agoVerizon and TMobile are voice service providers, but not in the 2411 in question. The providers in question are small phone companies.
- joe_the_user 2y agoMy googling kind of indicates these are VoIP providers. But it still seems weird there are this many. My vague guess is that these many providers have existed primarily to facilitate robocalling - to force the FCC to play wack-a-mole to get rid of them and FCC is now acting on them en masse, which might be more effective. But people who know this stuff might pipe up on the question.
- rahimnathwani 2y agothere aren’t 2,411 cell companies Verizon and T-Mobile primarily provide their voice services using cell towers. But voice services existed before cell phones! They were delivered over copper cables between phone exchanges and people's homes. Some people and especially businesses still have these 'landlines'. I would imagine that most customers of the companies on this list use neither landlines nor cell phones to access their voice services. Instead they likely use some sort of IP-based voice protocol like SIP or IAX.
- RajT88 2y ago"The sleeper has awakened" it feels like. The benevolent dictator which is the FCC is finally making some progress. I fear the FCC will start reversing this progress once the new guy takes the reins. Without further comment: https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/18/media/brendan-carr-trump-fcc-nominee-project-2025/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/18/media/brendan-carr-trump-fcc-...
- Hilift 2y agoA voice/wireless provider can abuse a lot of things and get away with it now. Even if it is an obvious problem, the FCC doesn't do anything about specific complaints unless you hire an attorney to file a formal complaint. All of the wireless providers that sell cheap wireless can terminate your account and say they don't know you and there's nothing you can do. Actual telecoms that have skin in the game (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, etc) can't do that due to there is usually a state/local regulator that can intervene.
- technothrasher 2y ago> there is usually a state/local regulator that can intervene. I was pretty shocked that when I complained to my state regulator about Verizon completely ignoring an issue with my business lines, I quickly got a call from a VP at Verizon grovelling and asking me what he could do for me. I said I needed my issue fixed, and then made what I thought was a crazy unrelated request- I wanted FIOS run all the way down the street to my business, and I'd been told previously that Verizon had no plans to expand FIOS in my area. Well, they fixed my issue within an hour, and within two weeks, they rolled trucks, ran the fiber down the street, and we had FIOS service up and running. They were obviously good and afraid of the state regulator.
- sitkack 2y agoI think I need whatever problem you had. Would it be easy to repro?
- gosub100 2y agoIf this leader is the good guy, why did it take them 4 years to do anything? That's a poor measure of progress. The best thing they could do is make it impossible to spoof numbers or at least be able to reject them. Even then, you should be able to block anyone calling from a number that you cannot call back.
- khana 2y ago[dead]
- dmurray 2y agoThis seems like the US catching up with the EU. The normal complaint about the EU's approach to regulation is that it's too vague and companies won't do business there in case they're found in breach of the vague laws. In practice, at least on this subject, this just isn't a problem. I can't link to the directive that outlaws spam phone calls (it predates GDPR) but the telecoms clearly get told to stop facilitating them and yet I've never heard of a company that claims they were erroneously barred from the market.
- bityard 2y agoI _really_ wanted the headline to read "2600 phone providers"
- latexr 2y agoA lot of people won’t understand the reference. An explanation or a link would be useful. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phreaking#2600_hertz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phreaking#2600_hertz
- jmhammond 2y agoThis person is putting Hacker in hacker news
- gxs 2y ago[flagged]
- latexr 2y agoHoly moly, chill. There was no criticism, nitpicking, or “telling others what to do”. What an absurd extrapolation. It was a polite and harmless observation—one that I would have appreciated getting myself, by the way—on a funny comment that requires prior knowledge to understand the joke. And yeah, you are overanalysing. Despite having read and enjoyed Mitnick’s Ghost in the Wires¹ I had absolutely forgotten 2600 was the specific frequency and had to hop around a few links to recall what this was about. Who would self-congratulate on something so small? Hacker News is ostensibly about curiosity, so explaining references is absolutely on topic. And being lazy is a hacker trait, I personally dislike when I don’t pursue something interesting because there was no easy link to follow. The irony in your comment is something else. Don’t assume bad faith. ¹ https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10256723-ghost-in-the-wires https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10256723-ghost-in-the-wi...
- gxs 2y agoFWIW I preemptively acknowledged the irony in my comment because I admit it was a little ludicrous. I wasn’t responding to your comment, I was would have kept it to myself as it wasn’t necessarily directed towards you personally > Don't assume bad faith Yes this is a personal shortcoming I am working on :)
- MyFirstSass 2y agoI'm in Northern Europe and lately spam calls, and especially spoofing from random peoples numbers have become so bad i know multiple who stopped taking any calls, or even changed their phone numbers because they got too many calls, or angry people called them because their number was spoofed. To me the whole system is archaic - i know gen z would never ever take a call from someone they don't know, or even call each other - it's simply not something you do - it would be like reading your spam mails. And i'm coming to the same conclusion, answering random people is naive. Practically we need something new though.
- pavel_lishin 2y ago> And i'm coming to the same conclusion, answering random people is naive. Which is why people who pick up are great targets for whatever garbage is being peddled.
- SoftTalker 2y agoYeah I’m old enough to almost be a boomer and I don’t answer the phone if the caller is not in my contacts.
- analog31 2y agoI am a boomer, and I don't answer the phone. "If it's important, they'll leave a message."
- SoftTalker 2y agoAnd if it’s really important they’ll send a letter.
- imoverclocked 2y agoAnd once they have done that in triplicate, I might answer the phone.
- 2y ago
- demaga 2y agoThis is the change I'd like to see in the world! Way to go USA
- colechristensen 2y agoI got three spam phone calls in the span of 5 minutes today. Two of them with the exact same recorded message. Anybody know if there is some program where I can get compensated for this harassment? (I vaguely remember of hearing about some program)
- wbsun 2y agoI've decided to only receive calls/msgs from my contacts. On iPhone, you can do it by "Silence Unknown Callers". Instead of pretending I can ignore the spam calls, I'd rather take the risk when something super important are coming from an unknown number...
- pavel_lishin 2y agoNot really an option for me - my child's care providers may call me from an unexpected phone number, plus the occasional doctor phone call from a number that's not the same one I call to schedule appointments, etc.
- ses1984 2y agoCan’t they leave voicemail? Spam basically never leaves voicemail.
- ars 2y agoThat only works if you have no family. Because you risk an emergency provider being unable to reach you if something happens, or even something as simple as your kid/spouse losing their phone and trying to call you from a borrowed phone.
- kussenverboten 2y agoIt can't happen too soon. When/if it does happen I will need to unblock the 1000 numbers that called me repeatedly. At one point, I wanted to block the entire 202 area code. A feature I would have appreciated would have been to have the ability to figure out which block of numbers were allocated to that provider, and then block all the numbers allocated to that provider
- VOIPThrowaway 2y agoMost of us in this group failed to update our Robocall Mitigation information five months ago and are doing it now. Honestly, the bad actors are not in this list. Everybody in this list has implemented rate limits per the previous filing and are in compliance with other aspects of the FCC.
- LarsAlereon 2y agoI saw a lot of companies that either recently ceased operations or probably should have never registered in the first place. Real bad actors aren't going to be silly enough to fail to file their paperwork.
- dpifke 2y agoIt's crazy how slowly the FCC is moving on this: WCB notified each Company on March 29, 2024, that its certification was noncompliant with section 64.6305 because the Company had failed to submit an updated RMD certification and updated robocall mitigation plan by the February 26, 2024 deadline. WCB's notification informed each Company that it must submit an updated certification and updated robocall mitigation plan in the Robocall Mitigation Database by Monday, April 29, 2024. After this second deadline, the Companies still had not updated their RMD certifications and robocall mitigation plans with the required information; as a result, WCB referred each Company to the Bureau to initiate removal proceedings. 2,411 companies have been deficient since February. The FCC sent them a strongly worded letter in March, giving then a new deadline in April. Roughly seven months later, the FCC is finally starting enforcement procedures.
- Shank 2y ago> The FCC sent them a strongly worded letter in March, giving then a new deadline in April. Roughly seven months later, the FCC is finally starting enforcement procedures. To me, they’re trying to avoid any and all accusations that they’re moving unfairly quickly or terminating access without appropriate consideration if people missed the notice or needed more time to respond.
- jfengel 2y agoThat's generally how regulations work. Which means they're always getting screamed at from two sides: one who thinks they're going too slowly, and the other who thinks they're abusive for doing anything at all.
- codedokode 2y agoWhat I would do is I would simply open a new company every time the old company is shut down.
- NelsonMinar 2y agoPretty sure most Americans would support the FCC taking swift retributive action the very first day it was legal. These companies didn't just accidentally miss the notice. They have been active in profiting off of fraud for years and know exactly what they are doing.
- cosmojg 2y agoThe main reason I use a Google Pixel is because of its automated call screening feature. I crank it up to maximum sensitivity (screen all unknown numbers) and answer every call that gets through because it's always a human, and it's never a spam call. I'm surprised more smartphone companies haven't already implemented similar features.
- tantalor 2y agoI don't get why other phones don't do this. Is it complicated? I think it just plays a recorded voice greeting. It's simpler than a answering machine. There is no fancy AI or anything like that.
- Jeremy1026 2y agoiPhones also have the ability to block unknown callers.
- MBCook 2y agoPlus you can get apps with caller lists. I have one from Verizon since they are my carrier. For free it does an amazing job blocking spam calls. If I was willing to pay (I’m not) it would tell me what kind of spam call it is. Not worth the price. I still don’t answer calls unless they’re in my address book or I’m expecting one. But I get very very few calls anyway thanks to the app. And they are allowed to leave voicemails, which they never do. Real callers do if I get an unexpected genuine call. Add in the features iOS has had in the last few releases to be able to see transcriptions of voicemails, now live as they’re being left, and most of the hassle is gone. The spammers trained everyone to stop answering. I shouldn’t have to do any of this. But it’s better than it was a few years ago. Text is the new spam hell for me.
- ornornor 2y ago> iOS has had in the last few releases to be able to see transcriptions of voicemails Never saw that
- coding123 2y agoJust shut them all down for a few weeks to give this whole thing some teeth.
- atonse 2y agoTo me the real evil is providers like Twilio that are happy to not enforce this stuff cuz it makes them tons of money. They’re like the Facebook/instagram of SMS, talk a big game but happily let all the stuff continue to happen.
- kragen 2y agoIs there a list? I'd like to know if my SIP provider is on it, ideally before it gets shut down. Aha, the list was linked from the original URL, but dang unfortunately changed it to the plain text news release https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-408083A1.txt https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-408083A1.txt which doesn't link to the list. The original URL was https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-could-block-over-2400-providers-robocall-mitigation-database https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-could-block-over-2400-provi..., which links to https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-24-1235A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-24-1235A1.pdf, which lists the providers that will be shut down. And I'm happy to see that my SIP provider isn't on it.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoAnd mine is on the list .. and it's the only phone number I have for all my banks and other accounts. Looks like I'm frakd. And no, I'm not a robocaller, in fact I never used this phone to call or text anything, just to receive texts.
- rahimnathwani 2y agoThe article says "Removal from the database means other providers will be prohibited from accepting call traffic from these providers." So perhaps inbound calls and inbound texts will be fine?
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoHope so very much.
- ars 2y agoIf they end up on this list they will shut down shortly after, and you better find out if it will be possible to transfer your number if that happens. I would contact the provider and ask them their intentions, and if you are not satisfied leave while you still can.
- 2y ago
- ezfe 2y agoI stopped getting junk calls about 3-6 months ago. Just election texts (Massachusetts) but no spam texts or calls. AT&T and Verizon (dual sim)
- xivzgrev 2y agoGood. I hope AT&T is included in the notice - I get spam calls daily
- blindriver 2y agowhy is this taking so long? On another note, I want a phone that complete has no connection to the phone system, ie. no phone number, but has cell connectivity so that I can make data calls using whatsapp or similar. Can someone please make this?
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoSure, airalo, for example. ~ $5/GB
- ac29 2y agoEvery major US cell carrier has data only plans and I'm sure they exist in other countries too.
- greentea23 2y agoWhatsApp/Signal/Telegram require a SIM enabled non-VoIP phone number available to receive SMS at all times in case they decide to reverify you. Doesn't necessarily have to be the same device, but still quite annoying.
- nuker 2y agoI think most numbers are scavenged from shipping details. Just delete or put an obvious fake phone number in address book of your online shop accounts. Valid address and email is enough for delivery.
- domoregood 2y agoWould have been more poetic if it was 2600 phone providers instead of 2400.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- eleveriven 2y agoThis feels like a long-overdue step, but it also highlights a deeper issue: why were over 2,400 providers not compliant in the first place?
- jonathanyc 2y agoThe vast majority of the scam or spam texts I receive come from one provider: Bandwidth (https://www.bandwidth.com/ https://www.bandwidth.com/). They technically allow you to report phone numbers (https://www.bandwidth.com/legal/report-a-phone-number/ https://www.bandwidth.com/legal/report-a-phone-number/) but most of the time they close my requests claiming that even though the user is obviously running a pig butchering scam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_butchering_scam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_butchering_scam), they haven't said anything that is technically illegal yet. Once I reported some obviously fake collections calls; they kept calling me and saying that I needed to respond to a "pending matter" otherwise it would be "escalated." Bandwidth claimed this wasn't abuse and was a legitimate collections business. To me they're just a nuisance, but the elderly and other vulnerable people have lost their entire retirement savings to these kinds of scams (https://www.propublica.org/article/whats-a-pig-butchering-scam-heres-how-to-avoid-falling-victim-to-one https://www.propublica.org/article/whats-a-pig-butchering-sc...). It's not good that Bandwidth is abetting this.
- nixosbestos 2y agoI only use data-only SIMs and my only number is my voip number. I use Zoiper on Android and it is only active when I make outbound calls or have a pre-arranged call. (Voicemails are copied to azure storage and emailed to me) I got the last of my friends and close family on SMS on WhatsApp and the "but why?" Immediately became "oh my god this is so much better, I can use it on my computer?!" Whatsapp calls are exempted from Do Not Disturb which my phone is permanently in. I disable notifications from the Messaging app. Literally never any spam calls or texts, ever. Life is good. Everything else PTSN/SIP, SMS, MMS, RCS, it's ALL lipstick on a really ugly pig. Oh except shitty sites that think phone numbers are a good verification mechanism and block VOIP numbers. Meanwhile I could just go get an voice+data esim for next to nothing. Just stupid.
- mikeocool 2y agoFWIW, my previous company is on that list — they provide telephony services as part of a CRM product (making robocalls via the product would be very difficult, and very noticeable given the scale). The only reason they are in the Robocall Mitigation database at all is because they briefly tried out a telephony provider years ago who required registering as part of their setup process. They now use a vendor who handles robocall mitigation and registration in the database for them. Anecdotal, but it’s certainly possible that many companies on this list aren’t actually facilitating robocalls (though obviously, given the number of calls I get, many are).
- sdenton4 2y agoThat sounds.... Fine? I'm totally fine with some collateral damage in this space - the crm can surely contact out their telephony needs to someone who can actually keep up with the regulations.
- fuzzfactor 2y agoI think this could be some collateral damage from negotiated rulemaking. Seems to me that each time the FCC overhauls their (actually the US citizens') airwaves, there's always more people that want a piece than there were the previous time. Plus some of the same old big players want more. In a big way. The high-powered operators have the strong lobbying efforts but this is a strict government agency and broadcasters do not always get their way. So they have to go into negotiations with flexible business models to build on what they already have, or for new ventures. The only thing the FCC has to bargain with is the airwaves themselves. So both sides make compromises until agreement is reached. When the FCC will not budge, the business model must change. Then the licensee comes back with a revised business model, giving up some lucrative plans in exchange for the FCC to be flexible also. If the FCC settles with good will after only giving in a small amount to the operators' ambitions, everything seems about as fair as it can be and things go forward with only a "slight change" to accommodate the "new normal". All the FCC ever compromises is the airwaves themselves, even if it's only a little bit. It never goes the other way. Little by little the usefulness of the airwaves to the citizens is chipped away at in favor of those who are more empowered than ever to use the airwaves against the citizens instead. And that's above and beyond the financial implications. Not just the airwaves. When a recognized greedy operator (usually regulated) wants permission to blatantly rip off the ratepayers more than ever (very obvious in the fine print), any decent regulator catches it in the first draft and starts negotiating it away ASAP before the public finds out how bad it was really intended to be for them. This bold-faced greed doesn't really slip past that many regulators, it's just too extreme to begin with. So basically on behalf of the operators, the public representative waters down the proposal to something they think might have a chance for approval, without seeming too much like a complete public giveaway from the beginning. And even then, when the idea is to get more money out of everybody all the time, and more often too, everybody understands that, plus it's one of the most common business models that doesn't take any acumen at all. But that way there's always the significant fraction of the financially non-prosperous who could barely afford to participate already and would be devastated by any rate increase whatsoever. Well that's who the compromises will made in the name of, so the cost increases for the protected group (for those relatively few poor citizens) can be held dramatically below maximum levels. It sure looks good on paper and can be pointed to as some real compromise. As long as it is agreed that everyone else can be ripped of like never before, that will more than make up for it. Only one side is negotiating in a way that can be taken to the bank no matter what. I think at one time cell carriers were negotiating to rip off customers worse, and they couldn't get their way without letting "competitors" use their networks like never before. Which gave rise to the reseller gold rush until that niche ended up being filled by a few major (usually decent legitimate) marketers getting most of the true competitive monthly consumer dollars. Resellers like Cricket or Metro without their own radio towers, giving customers a slightly better deal to use the same wireless networks owned by places like AT&T, T-Mobile, etc. Some would say better than no regulation at all, but I think rule migration in this direction has allowed a well-crafted robocaller to get operational more often than a competitive new cellular reseller could ever do again. And now there's hundreds if not thousands which have been added to the list right under everybody's nose for years. Who knew?
- Suppafly 2y agoGood. Nothing of value will be lost.
- sylware 2y agoLook at the bright side of things: nobody sane and not pathologically naive, will answer an unknown number phone call anymore.
- TheRealPomax 2y agoI'll believe it when I see it, because the FCC is about to loose all of its power.
- boohoo123 2y agoThe real question, which is why these issues still persist, is why the heck are people answering AND responding to these robocallers. They're making money somehow or it wouldn't be lucrative to keep doing it.
- munk-a 2y agoPeople get scammed every day - especially older folks and non-native speakers. There is a huge scam up here in Canada targeting immigrants informing them that their passports are being held by <local embassy> - the scam call isn't in English to minimize how quickly it gets reported and seems to rake in a fair number of folks. It's really difficult to solve these problems through education alone.
- boohoo123 2y agofrom reading other comments apparently phone calls now generate json web tokens to be authenticated, but loses the jwt when switching over to tdm lines or coming from tdm. So why not just only allow authenticated calls from sip/voip lines to any destination and only allow calls from tdm to tdm. it would rid any unauthenticated sip/voip calls and not allow any spam coming from tdm lines to modern systems.
- smcleod 2y agoHow on earth do you end up with >2400 phone providers in the first place? There must be a lot of profit being made off people?
- fred_is_fred 2y agoMy (medium sized) city offers fiber internet and added phone for people who still want "home phones". I assume there's lots of small municipalities or even smaller private ISPs that offer it.
- indrora 2y agoThere's a lot of places on this earth. 2,400 providers isn't even a million customers per company for the US (333million)
- BehindBlueEyes 2y agoTangential question: does anyone here know if/when apple is going to fix their missed call list usability? I probably get extra spam calls because my iphone keeps thinking that when i scroll through the missed call lists, the first or last position of my finger is a click and it calls that number. Sure i can hang up immediately but now the spammers know my number is valid. Never had this issue on any of my previous non-iphones because it didn't mistake scrolling for a touch to call as much, and even if it did there was a confirmation message at least...
- gsuuon 2y agoFantastic that progress is being made on this. Hopefully it's enough to stem the tide, though consumer behavior wrt calls has probably already fundamentally shifted. It'll take a long _long_ time before folks who have stopped picking up are comfortable answering a random call again.